I think there is a flaw in thinking that "Creators" have some intrinsic value. The reason the middle gets pushed out is correct in this article but it is missing an important point: there are too many creators.

That is why the top gets heavier and the bottom spreads out.

The problem with this line of thinking is that the more humanity succeeds at becoming efficient at providing for its essential goods and services, the more the economy rests on unnecessary ones. Should we really accept that the more successful we are, the less individuals can expect to be valued?

That's true.

Although I think the article is really hinting at a larger problem than just creators. The problem of the power law distribution - few winners taking all vs the losers in the long thin tail. Sometimes it's not an entirely meritocratic distribution, quality doesn't always rise to the top.

Same thing is happening with pay and remuneration as with content. I abhor the whole 1% crap, but it sorta seems like a thumbtack, forgive the analogy...

The problem is that creating is what most people want to do. So "creators" does have intrinsic value.